Reference no: EM131898091 , Length: word count:3000

Review of an Existing Search System

1. Introduction

People use search or Information Retrieval (IR) technologies in different ways and within different contexts for locating relevant information. Most websites and information services include functionalities to assist end users with searching for and browsing information (e.g. IR systems, facets, etc.). These, combined with effective information architecture design, can support information finding.

The aim of this coursework is for you to investigate the features provided by a specific website to support users with finding information through searching, i.e. for the kind of information seeking where the starting point is formulating a query. Systems provide various features to assist users with the search process, such as articulating their needs, formulating and refining queries, examining search results, and browsing. Further details of search systems and user interfaces can be found in textbooks by Hearst (2009), Wilson, (2011), etc. Users interact with search system functionalities whilst engaged in various tasks, ranging from identifying known-items, through subject searches to more exploratory forms of searching.

This coursework requires you to carry out a form of ‘expert' assessment of the search functionalities provided by one of a selection of websites. You will consider how well the search system meets the needs of its users undertaking their typical search tasks. You will also review and critically assess how well the system enables users to retrieve information items.

More specifically, this coursework requires that you do the following:

- Select a website/search system from the list provided (2.1).
- Consider who the users of your chosen system might be, and describe their typical information needs (2.1).
- Select two different types of search task. For each one, develop one or more scenarios to illustrate why users use your chosen search system (2.2).
- Investigate the selected system in detail and describe the range of functionalities it provides to support users as they search for information (2.3).
- Assess retrieval effectiveness for a set of typical search queries (2.4).
- Conduct a heuristic evaluation to assess the usability of the search user interface (2.5).
- Based upon the assessment carried out in the previous sections and you engagement with the relevant literature, make recommendations for improvements that could be made to the search system and search user interface (2.6).

Each of these steps will be described in more detail in the following sections. You must write up your review in the form of a 3,000 word structured report (excluding abstract, table of contents, bibliography and appendices). As a piece of academic work you are expected to engage with the research literature and provide references to justify and support your writing. Section 2 provides more information on what you need to do to carry out this assignment. Sections 3 and 4 provide details on producing the written report, including submission details and its overall structure.

2. What you need to do

Select a website/search system and identify typical users

From the following list of websites that incorporate search functionalities, select one you would like to review:

- StarPlus library catalogue
- OCLC WorldCat.org library - main catalogue search
- Gov.uk
- Pubmed
- Europeana
- The British Library - select one of the catalogues
- Getty Images
- The Guardian newspaper
- Rijksmuseum - search in the Rijksstudio
- YouTube

Work through and experiment with all of the above before making your selection.

For the selected website, examine it in detail, focusing on the functionalities that support users as they carry out their search tasks (e.g., search box, facets), rather than features that may support other types of task, (e.g. buying or sharing items). Think about who the users are likely to be, what characteristics they are likely to possess, and for what purposes they would use the website and its search system.

Select appropriate search tasks and define user scenarios

Next consider the types of search task1 that are likely to be performed using the site. There are many ways to distinguish between different types of search task (see the Week 5 lecture on "Users and User Interfaces"). Some of the types of task are specific to particular websites or domains, such as library catalogues or web search engines. However, a general distinction between tasks is fact-finding vs. information gathering search tasks (Kellar et al., 2007):

- Fact Finding: the goal of a fact finding task is to find one or more specific pieces of information (e.g., name of a person or an organisation, product information, a numerical value; a date).
- Information Gathering: the goal of an information gathering task is to collect several pieces of information about a given topic (e.g. subject or topic search)

There are many other types of search task (see, e.g. (Toms, 2011)). For example, a more detailed set of search task types could include the following:

- Known-item search: the search for a particular information item that is known to exist (e.g. the search for a specific webpage, a specific book, or a particular image, etc.). Note that a search for any book about football, or a search for any picture of London is not a known item search.
- Factual search: the search for a factual piece of information, e.g. the specific date when a product was produced, etc.
- Location search: the search for the location of an object or item, e.g. where can I find copies of a particular painting or book?
- Search for instruction: the search for a set of instructions or explanation for how to achieve something, e.g. how to set up a user account, plan a trip, etc.
- Search for description: the search for a rich description of an object, place or other item (e.g. find a description of the Mona Lisa, a description of the landscape in Hawaii, etc.
- Finding introductory material: the search for an introduction to a topic, e.g. an introduction to "complex numbers", or an introduction to Shannon and Weaver's definition of entropy, etc.
- Subject or topic search: the search for information about a particular subject or topic, e.g. as many books as possible about a specific topic, multiple pages on the same topic or subject area, etc.

Consider these different types of task and then choose two different types of task which are appropriate and realistic for your chosen website. Select one example of a fact finding task (e.g. known-item, location search, factual search, etc.) and one example of an information gathering task (e.g. subject or topic search, finding multiple books by a particular author, etc.). Make sure that you focus on search tasks rather than other types of tasks (e.g. buying items).

Consider why these tasks are suitable for your chosen website and its users. Then, create one or more user scenarios for each search type, tailored to your choice of search system. A scenario is a short description of some specific task. For example:

- "A student is trying to find a book for their English course. The book is called Noughts & Crosses by Malorie Blackman. This type of search is referred to as a ‘known item search' in which an item, in this case a book title, is already known by name."

- "The user would like a brief overview of the materials available on a specific subject (known as a subject search). In this case, the user is an art student and requires detailed background information on the artist LS Lowry."

Investigate search features and functionality

Investigate the functionalities provided in the search user interface to support users as they search for information. Based upon the tasks you created in 2.2, explain how the system supports the search process for each search type. The search process may include query formulation, examining search results for relevance, reformulating the query, viewing items, filtering search results, etc. See, for example, Sutcliffe & Ennis (1998), Hearst (2009) and Wilson (2011). You will find it helpful to create example (but realistic) queries to reflect the tasks and scenarios that you have defined in 2.2. These will help you to identify the presence of features, such as spelling correction, synonyms, what happens when no results are retrieved, etc. The experiences gained from carrying out the search tasks will help you identify strengths and weaknesses of the search system.

As you investigate the search system, compile a checklist of features based on the categorisation of search user interface features by Wilson (2011). These are organised into 4 groups:

- Input: features that allow the searcher to express what they are looking for (e.g. search box, search by example, facets, etc.);

- Control: features that help searchers to modify, refine, restrict, or expand their Input (e.g. spelling correction, navigating between results pages, sorting results, filters, etc.);

- Informational: features that provide results or information about results (e.g. query highlighting, snippets, visualisations, etc.);

- Personalisable: features that relate specifically to searchers and their previous interactions (e.g. feedback, recommendation, etc.).

Written report

Following your investigation of the selected search system, and engagement with literature, you must write up your findings into a written report that is worth 100% of the module mark. Sections 3 and 4 provide more details on the structure of the report.

You should write your report for the website owner. They may have technical expertise and be familiar with the domain, but less familiar with search systems and evaluation.

Your report should be structured as follows. A short description is provided about what to include in each section, the percentage of marks assigned for each section, and a guideline word count for each section.

Structure of report

Structured abstract. Include a structured informative abstract (no more than 250 words - this is not included in the word count for the assignment) that contains the following sections:
- Aim(s) of the report.
- Selected website / search system.
- Main findings (including strengths, weaknesses and improvements).

No more than 250 words - this is not included in the word count for the assignment. The abstract carries no marks, but should be present. Marks will be deducted from "presentation" if you do not include it.

Table of contents. Include each of the core sections identified here; use the numbered style, e.g., 1.0. 1.1, 1.2, etc., and include page numbers. The Table of Contents is not included in the word count for the assignment or the overall mark, but should be present. Marks will be deducted from "presentation" if you do not include the Table of Contents.

Description of selected search system [15%]. You should briefly describe the purpose of the website, the users and likely uses. Where possible, you should provide (e.g. 2-3) references to support your description of the user's, and their information needs and tasks. In this section you should describe the functionalities offered by the search system using the four categories proposed by Wilson (2012): input: features, control features, informational features and personalisable features. You should present this in the form of a table (not included in word count) stating category, feature provided and its purpose. You may use screenshots to aid your description where applicable.

Supporting the user's search process [15%]. In this section, you should describe the search tasks and queries created in 2.2. You can provide these in the form of a table (not included in word count) in an appendix which describes:
- The type of search tasks you have chosen.
- The search scenario(s) you have written for each type of search task.
- The queries you have used for each search scenario.

Based on your investigation of using the search system (2.3) to carry out your search tasks (2.2), you should walk through the search tasks and how the system responded, highlighting particular issues or useful features. You may find it easier to discuss the results of this study within the typical search process, e.g. using the retrieval model presented in (Sutcliffe & Ennis, 1998), and making use of screenshots where applicable.

Attachment:- Review of an Existing Search System.rar